BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

95 results for “transfer pricing”+ Penny Stockclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai371Delhi171Chennai95Kolkata85Ahmedabad64Jaipur59Indore53Calcutta35Chandigarh32Hyderabad29Cuttack23Pune23Bangalore20Guwahati19Surat18Rajkot16Nagpur10Lucknow10Amritsar6Patna5Varanasi5Raipur4Jodhpur2Visakhapatnam2Karnataka1Agra1Orissa1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 10(38)221Penny Stock70Exemption69Capital Gains61Long Term Capital Gains58Natural Justice48Addition to Income47Section 6844Deduction26

VIDYA REDDY ,CHENNAI vs. ITO INL. TAXATION WARD 1(2) , CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2016/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2016/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mrs.Vijaya Prabha, JCITFor Respondent: 15.05.2018
Section 10(38)Section 68

transferred to the beneficiary at a very nominal price mostly off-line through preferential allotment or off-line sale The beneficiary (an individual) holds the shares for one year, the statutory period after which LTCG is exempt u/s.10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the meantime the operators rig the price of the stock and gradually raise

SOHANRAJ UTTAMCHAND ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 2 , CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 95 · Page 1 of 5

Section 1024
Disallowance16
Section 40A(3)14
ITA 1787/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1787/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vs The Dcit, Shri Sohanraj Uttamchand, Non-Corporate Circle – 2, 24/12. Raghaviah Road, Chennai T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aaapu7932P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.M. Dass, CITFor Respondent: 21.12.2017
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 250(6)

penny stocks operates is prevalent in the case of the assessee. (xvii) The entire contract note provided by M/s. B. Lodha Securities Limited, Mumbai related only to the sale of shares of M/s. PFL Infotech Ltd. (xviii) Though many of the notice U/s.131 of the Act sent to the buyers of the shares was returned as un-served, the assessee

NEETA BOTHRA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 9(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2508/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2507 & 2508/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2012-13 & 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Mrs. Neeta Bothra, 1/1, General Patters Road, Non-Corporate Ward-9(3) Chennai- 600 002. Chennai-6. Pan: Aaipb 0445J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.Suresh Periasamy,JCITFor Respondent: 14.07.2021
Section 10(38)Section 68

transfer of shares by the assessee as unexplained cash credit. No doubt, M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Ltd. may be named as penny stock by the income tax department based on facts gathered during the course of investigation. It may also be correct that financials of the company may not support such a huge rise in share price

NEETA BOTHRA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 9(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2507/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2507 & 2508/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2012-13 & 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Mrs. Neeta Bothra, 1/1, General Patters Road, Non-Corporate Ward-9(3) Chennai- 600 002. Chennai-6. Pan: Aaipb 0445J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.Suresh Periasamy,JCITFor Respondent: 14.07.2021
Section 10(38)Section 68

transfer of shares by the assessee as unexplained cash credit. No doubt, M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Ltd. may be named as penny stock by the income tax department based on facts gathered during the course of investigation. It may also be correct that financials of the company may not support such a huge rise in share price

SMT. SUDHA EASHWAR,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 14 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2342/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2342/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 V. Smt. Sudha Eashwar, The Income Tax Officer No.23A, P.T.Rajan Salai, Non-Corporate Ward-14(3) K.K.Nagar, Chennai Chennai-600 078. [Pan: Alxps 0601 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms.Sumathi Venkatraman, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.01.2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms.Sumathi Venkatraman
Section 143(3)

transferred to assessee’s DMAT account . The assessee has claimed that during previous year relevant to impugned ay: 2014-15 , the assessee has sold 7900 shares of Turbotech Engineering Limited for Rs. 40,22,940/- , translating into long term capital gains of Rs. 39,77,886/- , which long term capital gains were claimed as an exempt

G.NARENDAR CHORDIA ,CHENNAI vs. ITO NCW 5(2) , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for 14

ITA 1819/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. H.C. Khincha & Deepa K. C.AFor Respondent: Shri. B. Sagadevan, IRS, JCIT
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 148

prices of the shares of the penny stock companies were manipulated to 20 to 25 times so that investors made bogus long term capital gains on sale of its shares. Ld. Assessing Officer noted that Shri. Prakash Kumar Jojodia had admitted floating a number of companies through which transactions in cash, cheques and RTGS credits were carried

ANJANA JAIN,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 4(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2606/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2606/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms. Sushma Harini, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Sahadevan, JCIT
Section 10(38)

penny stock. The shares of Bakra Pratishtan Limited were transferred in the name of the assessee. The purchase price of shares

NIRMALA KUMARI CHORDIA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NCW 5(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1636/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. B. Sagadevan, JCITFor Respondent: 11.10.2018
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 148

prices of the shares of the penny stock companies were manipulated to 20 to 25 times so that investors made bogus long term capital gains on sale of its shares. Ld. Assessing Officer noted that Shri. Prakash Kumar Jojodia had admitted floating a number of companies through which transactions in cash, cheques and RTGS credits were carried

M.MATHIVANAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 5, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as partly

ITA 1166/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1166/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shri. M. Mathivanan, Assistant Commissioner Of Income Old No. 3, New No. 5,Bharathiyar Street, Vs. Tax, Vivekananda Nagar,Kodungalyur, Non-Corporate Circle -5, Chennai – 600 118. Chennai.

For Appellant: Shri. H. Yeshwanth Kumar, CA
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

penny stock company. From the material available on record it appears that a copy of information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. It is not brought on record the relationship of the assessee with the promoters of M/s Concrete Credit Limited. It is also not brought

M.KIRAN KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3374/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri G.Baskar, Advocate
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 2(22)(e)

penny stock shares. The AO further was of the opinion that the Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata carried out a country-wide investigation to unearth the organized racket of generating bogus entries of long term capital gains which is exempt from tax. According to the AO, the hike in share price of the company is unrealistic and that the assessee

PRABHA SRISRIMAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE WARD 10(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 3513/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 10(38)Section 68

transfer of shares of M/s.Kailash Auto Finance Ltd., u/s.68 of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the assessee has furnished all evidences to prove that said transaction is genuine, which is carried out through proper channel. The Ld.AR further submitted that the AO has made addition towards consideration u/s.68 of the Act, without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing

SHRI. RAJENDRA KUMAR HIRAWAT,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 23 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 406/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.406/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Acit, Shri Rajendra Kumar Hirawat, No.10, Monteith Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 23(1), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Chennai.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)

penny stock company. From the material available on record it appears that a copy of information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. It is not brought on record the relationship of the assessee with the promoters of M/s Concrete Credit Limited. It is also not brought

NISHA,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORP CIR-9(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 875/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.406/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Acit, Shri Rajendra Kumar Hirawat, No.10, Monteith Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 23(1), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Chennai.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)

penny stock company. From the material available on record it appears that a copy of information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. It is not brought on record the relationship of the assessee with the promoters of M/s Concrete Credit Limited. It is also not brought

RAJENDRA KUMAR HIRAWAT (HUF),CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 23(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 407/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.406/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Acit, Shri Rajendra Kumar Hirawat, No.10, Monteith Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 23(1), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Chennai.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)

penny stock company. From the material available on record it appears that a copy of information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. It is not brought on record the relationship of the assessee with the promoters of M/s Concrete Credit Limited. It is also not brought

RAKHEE JAIN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLCE 17(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1375/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1375/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Rakhee Jain, The Assistant Commissioner Of No.35, Perumal Mudali Street, Vs. Income Tax, Sowcarpet, Non-Corporate Circle -17(1), Chennai – 600 070. Chennai.

For Respondent: Shri A R V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

penny stock company. From the material available on record it appears that a copy of information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. It is not brought on record the relationship of the assessee with the promoters of M/s Concrete Credit Limited. It is also not brought

VIDHYA,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 9,, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as partly

ITA 2222/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No.2222/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt. Vidhya, The Income Tax Officer, No. 704, B-Block, 1088, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward-9(5), Poonamallee High Road, Chennai. Vepery, Chennai – 600 007. [Pan: Acfpv 9837R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (%&यथ'/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

penny stock company. From the material available on record it appears that a copy of information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. It is not brought on record the relationship of the assessee with the promoters of M/s Concrete Credit Limited. It is also not brought

KAMLESH SHANTILAL JAIN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 3335/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Respondent: 10.02.2021
Section 147

penny stock and share price was rigged in collusion with certain parties and accordingly, made additions towards entire sale consideration received from sale of M/s. PS IT Infra & Services Ltd., as unexplained cash credits and brought to tax u/s. 68 of the Act. 8. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before learned CIT(A) but could not succeed

ASHOK JAIN,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 4(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2991/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P.Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2991/Chny/2017 "नधा!रण वष! /Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCITFor Respondent: 20.06.2018
Section 10(38)

penny stock broker. Admittedly, the statement said to be recorded from Shri Ashok Kumar Kayan was not furnished to the assessee. It is also not known whether the purchase price of the shares was paid by cheque or by cash. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee did not disclose the mode of payment of purchase price. In those circumstances

GUDDI MAGRAJJI,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 4(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2628/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P.Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2628/Chny/2017 "नधा!रण वष! /Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCITFor Respondent: 20.06.2018
Section 10(38)

penny stock broker. Admittedly, the statement said to be recorded from Shri Ashok Kumar Kayan was not furnished to the assessee. It is also not known whether the purchase price of the shares was paid by cheque or by cash. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee did not disclose the mode of payment of purchase price. In those circumstances

MAHESH KUMAR (HUF),CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 11(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the penalty appeal of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2392/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S.Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2563/Chny/2017 & 2392/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2014-15

For Respondent: Ms.R.Anita,C.I.T, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

penny stock company. From the material available on record it appears that a copy of information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. It is not brought on record the relationship of the assessee with the promoters of M/s Concrete Credit Limited. It is also not brought